Significant Infection Risk Reduction

Catheter Securement Impact on PICC-related CLABSI: A University Hospital Perspective1
M.S. Rowe , K. Arnold , T.R. Spencer
American Journal of Infection Control, Open Access, June 17, 2020

Background:
University of Arkansas for Medical Science
Analyzed a total of 7,779 PICCs over a four year period
Compared CLABSIs for SESD (SecurAcath) vs. AESD (Statlock)

Results:
Risk Ratio:  Those with an AESD had 3.88 times the risk for a CLABSI than those with a SESD
Percent Relative Effect: Those who had an AESD had a 288% increase in risk of CLABSI compared to those who had an SESD

Discussion:
The occurrence of CLABSIs yield tremendous negative consequences affecting patients and health care facilities associated with morbidity, mortality, and financial burdens.
The potential implications of this study serve to improve patient outcomes in this population.

Conclusion:
This retrospective, observational quality review found a substantial difference in relative risk among securement devices utilized in their population.
The difference in practice demonstrated direct positive impact on patient outcomes when using SESDs verses AESDs.
The results suggest the use of a SESDs in a setting can be beneficial by potentially decreasing the risks of CLABSIs.

Elizabeth Culverwell, Canterbury District Health, New Zealand, presented data from her institution that places approximately 1500 PICCs per year. They started using SecurAcath in mid-2015.

They found since switching to SecurAcath they have had 0% replaced line rate which provided savings of $59,250.

More importantly, they found infections dropped from 22 the year prior to 10 after SecurAcath was implemented. They estimate catheter infections cost $30,000 each to treat. Therefore, the savings from 12 reduced infections was $360,000.

Total hospital savings of $419,250 per year in infection and replaced line costs by switching to SecurAcath.

Dramatically Reduced Catheter Dislodgement

  • Catheter dislodgement defined as accidental removal or movement that resulted in loss of function
  • SecurAcath clinical data publications show very low dislodgement rates of 0–1.6%2-7
  • Adhesive securement devices have published dislodgement rates of 7-12%8-11
  • Many accidental dislodgements occur during dressing changes when the catheter is not secured

Watch a short demonstration of the SecurAcath.

Eliminate Suture Needlestick Risk

  • 385,000 sharps injuries to healthcare workers in the U.S. annually, over 2 million globally12
  • 22% are caused by suture needles13
  • Average cost to hospital of up to $3766 per exposure14
  • Serious cases involving bloodborne pathogen transmission far exceed average cost
    • Lifetime HIV-related medical costs up to $490,04515
    • Chronic Hepatitis C lifetime cost $64,49016
  • Fear, anxiety, emotional distress and productivity loss of healthcare workers create additional unnecessary burden

More About the Safety Considerations for Catheters

OSHA Fact Sheet: Securing Medical Catheters

CDC Sharps Injury Overview

Improved Efficiency

  • One SecurAcath secures for the life of the line
  • Catheter remains secure during dressing changes
  • Saves time during routine dressing changes
  • Dressing change can be done 3 minutes faster17
  • Allows easy catheter repositioning if catheter tip must be pulled back

SecurAcath Brochure

Watch how SecurAcath secures the catheter to prevent dislodgement.

References

    1. Rowe, et al, “Catheter Securement Impact on PICC-related CLABSI: A University Hospital Perspective” American Journal of Infection Control, Open Access, June 17, 2020
    2. Brescia, et al, “Subcutaneously anchored securement for peripherally inserted central catheters: Immediate, early, and late complications.” Journal of Vascular Access (2021) June
    3. McParlan et al, “Intravascular catheter migration: A cross-sectional and health-economic comparison of adhesive and subcutaneous engineered stabilisation devices for intravascular device securement.” Journal of Vascular Access (2020) Jan;21(1):33-38.
    4. Pittiruti, et al. “Clinical experience of a subcutaneously anchored sutureless system for securing central venous catheters.” British Journal of Nursing (2019) Jan 24;28(2):S4-14.
    5. Zerla et al. “Evaluating Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-Effectiveness of PICC Securement by Subcutaneously Anchored Stabilization Device.” Journal of Vascular Access 18.3 (2017):238-242.
    6. Dolcino et al. “Potential Role of a Subcutaneously Anchored Securement Device in Preventing Dislodgement of Tunneled-Cuffed Central Venous Devices in Pediatric Patients.” Journal of Vascular Access 18.6 (2017):540-545.
    7. Hughes, Meinir Elen. “Reducing PICC migrations and improving patient outcomes.” British Journal of Nursing 23:Sup1, (2014): S12-S18.
    8. Paquet, F. et al. “Impact of arm selection on the incidence of PICC complications: results of a randomized controlled trial,” JVA (2017) 18(5),408-414.
    9. Gibson, C. et al. “Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters: Use at a Tertiary Care pediatric Center,” JVIR (2013) 24, 1323-133.
    10. Le Royer, C. et al. “Prospective follow-up of complications related to peripherally inserted central catheters”, Médecine et Maladies Infectieuses (2013) 43, 350-355.
    11. Yamamoto, Alvin J., et al. “Sutureless securement device reduces complications of peripherally inserted central venous catheters.” Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 13.1 (2002): 77-81.
    12. Bouya S, et al. “Global Prevalence and Device Related Causes of Needle Stick Injuries among Health Care Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Annals of Global Health.” 2020;86(1):351–358. doi: 10.5334/aogh.2698
    13. Cooke C, Stephens J. “Clinical, Economic, and Humanistic Burden of Needlestick Injuries in Healthcare Workers.”  Medical Devices: Evidence and Research. 2017:10
    14. Lee J, Botteman M, Nicklasson L. “A Systematic Review of the Economic and Humanistic Burden of Needlestick Injury in the United States.” Am J Infect Control. 2004;32(3):E43. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2004.04.064
    15. Bingham A, et al. “Estimated Lifetime HIV-Related Medical Costs in the United States.” Sex Transm Dis. 2021 Apr 1;48(4):299-304. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0000000000001366.
    16. Rizavi H, et al. “Chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) Disease Burden and Cost in the United States.” Hepatology. 2013 Jun;57(6):2164-70. doi: 10.1002/hep.26218. Epub 2013 May 6.
    17. Gossens, et. al., SecurAstaP trial: securement with SecurAcath versus StatLock for PICCs, a randomised open trial.  BJM 2018